The trial of former Benue State
governor, Gabriel Suswan, and his Commissioner for Finance, Omodachi Okolobia,
commenced today before Justice A. R.
Mohammad of the Federal High Court sitting in
Maitama Abuja, with a prosecution witness telling the court how Suswan ordered
the sale of Benue State-owned shares through Elixir Investment Partners
Limited, a stock brokerage firm.
Both Suswan and Omodachi
are being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, on
a nine-count charge bordering on money laundering, abuse
of office and obtaining by false pretence to the tune of N3.1 bn.
Suswan and Okolobia were alleged to
have diverted the proceeds of the sale of shares owned by the Benue State
government and Benue Investment and Property Company Limited.
The offence is punishable under Section
15, Sub-section 3 of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act as amended in 2012.
At today’s hearing,
prosecution witness, Junaid Sa’id, an operative with the EFCC, told the court
how the Commission had swung into action upon receipt of a petition against the
accused persons.
Led in evidence by
Counsel to EFCC, Rotimi Jacobs, SAN, Sa’id said: “After the Commission received
a petition on July 14, 2015, both the staff of Benue Investment and Properties
Company (BIPC) and Elixir Investment Partners Limited were invited for
interrogation. Investigation revealed that Suswan had requested that
shares owned by Benue State be sold for the sum of N 10bn.
‘‘Thereafter, Elixir Investment Partners Limited was
appointed as stock brokers to carry out the sale of the shares. Elixir
realised over N9bn from the sale of the shares and was directed to make payment
into three accounts. Subsequently, the sum of N1bn was directed to
be paid to Benue Investment Properties Company and the balance into two
separate accounts in favour of Benue State Ministry of Finance.’’
According to him, when
payment was to be made by Elixir to one of the Benue State Ministry of Finance
accounts, it was discovered that the account belongs to Fanffash
Resources.
‘‘Okolobia directed
Elixir to pay the money into Fanffash Resources account,’’ he added.
Speaking further, Sa’id
told the court that letters were written to Zenith Bank Plc, requesting for the
mandate and account statements of Benue State Ministry of Finance and Fanffash
Resources.
He added: ‘‘it was
revealed that over N5bn was paid into the Benue State Ministry of Finance by
Elixir Investment Partners. A total of N3, 111, 8000, 18.5k was paid into Fanffash account domiciled with
Zenith Bank Plc.
‘‘Also, when a
letter of investigation was written to the Clerk of the House of Assembly to
verify if the House, at any time, gave approval for the sale of Benue State
Shares, the Clerk answered in the negative.’’
Sa’id also told the court
that the owner of Fanffash Resources, Abubakar Umar, confirmed to have received
the sum of N3, 111, 8000,
18.5k and converted same to the dollar equivalent, which amounted to $15.8.
According to him, Umar
delivered the money in cash to the first defendant at his residence in Maitama,
Abuja.
Sa’id also said
that the second defendant, in his statement, confirmed issuing the directives
for the payment made to Fanffash Resources and the Benue State Ministry of
Finance.
Okolobia, according to
Sa’íd, also confirmed that the first defendant gave the instruction for the
payment to be made.
However, when
prosecution counsel applied to tender the certified copy of the petition
against the accused persons, counsel to the first defendant, Joseph
Daudu, SAN, raised an objection, saying, “We are not comfortable with the
certified copy of the petition.”
Reacting, Jacobs said: “The
presumption of law is that the certified copy is as good as the original.
Section 105 of the Evidence Act stipulates that copies certified can be
tendered in place of the original.”
After listening to both
counsel, Justice Umar, however, admitted the certified copy of the petition as
Exhibit P1 and statements of witnesses as P2 for the first defendant (Suswan)
and P3 for second defendant (Okolobia), since there was no specific objection
raised by the defendant.
Other documents that were
tendered and admitted as exhibits include: House of Assembly (P4), reply to the
letter (P5) and the letter to Zenith Bank in relation to the two statements of
account (P6).
However, counsel to the
first defendant, Daudu, asked for adjournment to enable him study the documents
tendered and cross-examine PW1, a position that was supported by the counsel to
the second defendant, Audu Anuga.
The case has been
adjourned to January 18 and 19, 2016 for cross-examination and continuation of
trial.
No comments:
Post a Comment